Reporters
The next item is reporters. Do any reporters have any comments to make?
I have submitted a paper.
The most significant point is to report on a meeting that we had with Lilian Lawson from the Scottish Council on Deafness. We discussed several issues, including equality training in the Parliament. We agreed that in producing a strategy for equality training it is important that staff are made aware of the communication needs of people with hidden disabilities, such as those who are hard of hearing or are visually impaired. Lilian Lawson confirmed that she will forward a directory of training providers so that the Parliament's training manager has it for information.
Text telephones were discussed. They are a very interesting development. The Scottish Council on Deafness has been in discussion with British Telecom and hopes that it will soon be possible for all MSPs to be provided with a text telephone. The provision of training is equally important, so that MSPs and their staff know how to operate and use them. That has been an issue in the past. It would open up communication to a wider constituency.
In respect of the new Holyrood building, it was reassuring to learn that Lilian Lawson represents the Scottish Council on Deafness on the group that advises the Holyrood project on disability issues.
I shared with Lilian Lawson a response that I received from the Presiding Officer, which related to a contract to provide sign language and deaf awareness training to the Parliament. I was concerned that it was for a two-year period starting from April of this year, yet we were at the end of the year and nothing seemed to have been done to take that training forward. Sir David Steel advised that there was
"insufficient demand to run a course on signing in-house",
but added that a member of staff had completed stages 1 and 2 of the British sign language course at evening classes. He hopes that in future we can arrange an in-house course. He also stated:
"The contract was also awarded in anticipation of the need to provide deaf awareness training as part of our equal opportunities initiative to be launched early in the New Year."—[Official Report, Written Answers, Vol 9, p 203.]
We will wait to see how that fits into the bigger package.
We also discussed the training of British sign language interpreters, which we have discussed before—as has the Parliament. It was confirmed that there are still only 35 qualified British sign language interpreters in Scotland. That makes it difficult for people in commerce and people such as Lilian Lawson to come to meetings such as the one that she had with me, because before she can determine a suitable date she must ensure that a sign language interpreter is available. There are several difficulties related to training. No grants are available to support people through their studies, the training is part time and it can extend over a five to 10-year period.
Several recommendations have been produced. It is recommended that the committee continue to monitor the progress of the Parliament's equality training strategy. We have heard about it on several occasions over the past few months. We must also continue to monitor the progress of the Holyrood building to ensure that it is barrier free. We could also ask about what plans are in hand to ensure that text telephones are made available in the new building.
It is recommended that the committee ask the convener to write to the appropriate minister to clarify the number of qualified British sign language interpreters and highlight the potential limitations that that places on profoundly deaf people in undertaking even routine activities. In addition, we could ask for clarification on the status of trainee BSL interpreters, such as whether they could be classified as students so that they can access appropriate grant funding, if any is available. We could ask the Executive to encourage people, including its staff, to train as sign language interpreters.
Another issue is the "Playback" video resource pack. Members will have been advised about it. It was launched this year with extensive support from the Scottish Executive. Copies were sent to all local authorities and health trusts. No equivalent product is currently available. If members have not seen it, I advise that they should do so as it provides a good insight into issues that disabled young people face and the exclusion that they often experience.
Capability Scotland gave evidence at our meeting on 5 December. It was remitted to me to work with the clerks to produce recommendations arising from its evidence. I think that there are three recommendations—in fact, there are more than that.
Five.
Yes, there are five.
The first is that the convener should write to Capability Scotland to endorse our indication at last week's meeting that the committee supports its proposed survey of public buildings such as council offices, post offices and polling stations.
Another recommendation is that the convener should write to the Scottish Executive to ask whether it has responded to the Department for Education and Employment's consultation on the new Special Educational Needs and Disability Bill. If it has, we should ask whether it would be possible for this committee to receive a copy of its response and copies of other responses submitted by Scottish organisations. It is a Westminster-led bill that has implications for disability and education in Scotland.
The convener should also write to Glasgow City Council to ask it what consideration and consultation on disability has been undertaken in its local plan. Capability Scotland mentioned that very little seems to have been taken on board.
The convener should ensure that every MSP has received the MSP guide on disability. It is a good starting point to enable them to ensure that their services through constituency offices and the like are in line with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.
We should clarify whether the proposed special educational needs and disability in education bill will be the subject of a Sewel motion. If that is confirmed, we must find out whether the committee can take an active role in the proceedings.
I commend those recommendations to the committee.
Do members have questions or comments?
Why are we singling out Glasgow City Council to ask about its local plan?
Because the people from Capability Scotland who gave evidence mentioned that they were aware of that matter.
Should we broaden it to all councils?
I suggested that last time, but given that Glasgow City Council was mentioned in a public forum, we wanted to clarify the situation with it first.
That gives it the right of reply.
Absolutely.
The committee may want to consider the matter again and carry out a broader survey on whether the needs of the disabled are ever taken into account in local plans.
There is a cross-party group on deafness. Is it examining British sign language interpreters? A motion lodged by Cathie Craigie and Winnie Ewing was debated in Parliament. We could ask for an update from that group.
The cross-party group is examining the matter. Lilian Lawson works closely with the cross-party group on deafness. That is why I asked her about these issues. We have raised the matter in Parliament through members' business. I asked whether that had led to a noticeable improvement. She said, "Not really." A considerable push is needed to effect any change. Despite awareness raising and high-profile support, there are still only 35 qualified British sign language interpreters in Scotland. It is difficult to get students to accept the rigorous conditions of being a student of BSL.
The Scottish Executive is able to do something on this. I will write to it.
I intended to talk to Paul Grice about the new building, to ask if the committee could receive a presentation from the part of the project team that deals with access. Unfortunately, Linda Fabiani phoned to say that she will be very late. She is up to date on issues related to the Holyrood building. I hope that I will be able to organise a presentation in the new year, if not at a formal committee meeting then a presentation that members can attend to find out what is happening about access issues.
Are all the recommendations in the access report agreed?
Members indicated agreement.
Is it all right if we wait until after Christmas—boxing day—to send out the letters?
Members indicated agreement.
Annabel Goldie advised members about tutors of lip-reading, which is not unrelated to the matters that we have discussed. The Scottish course is now being administered by Donaldson's College in Edinburgh and is being validated by the Association of Teachers of Lipreading to Adults and the Oxford and Cambridge and Royal Society of Arts examination boards. We should recognise the need to increase the provision of tutors of lip-reading as another means of communication with sufferers from deafness.
Do other reporters have any comments?
I have five pages of scribbled notes, would members rather wait until it is properly presented?
Yes.
Before we move into private, I officially record my thanks to all members of the committee. As there has been a committee restructuring, different MSPs will be on the committee. I thank all the members who have served on the committee since its inception, especially Nora Radcliffe, who is leaving. I am sad that one of our reporters is leaving. She has done a great deal of work for the committee and is highly regarded by organisations in Scotland that deal with sexual orientation issues.
I thank the clerks, the Official Report, the sound recorders and everybody for their hard work. I look forward to seeing you all again in the new year.
Meeting continued in private until 11:20.